News Variety Reports Robert Pattinson is the new Batman

Who? Evidence, please.

Who cares? No, seriously? Who the fuck cares? He made a movie that has no connective tissue to other productions. He wanted it to stand alone. He took a character that has been adapted and reinterpreted time and again throughout comic history. There is nothing shameful or harmful in that adaptation.

Again, if this were the case, then perhaps Lucas tricked a studio in to letting him make his Flash Gordon movie under a different name. I guess Lucas is really ashamed of Star Wars...

 

Yawning intensifies.

 

I gotta ask, and maybe it's been answered. But at what point in Batman's 80 plus year history in comics has be not be drawn as a handsome and usually physically fit man? Even the older Wayne in the DKR and the damaged Wayne in Kingdom Come were good looking men.

 

Dumb arguments in this thread:

That superhero movies can ever be realistic.

That Superman '78, in particular, is realistic.

That Batman could totally happen.

That comic book Batman ever looked like Michael Keaton.

That the fact he didn't invalidates Burton's movies.

That superhero movies should only be serious.

That superhero movies should only be silly.

 

Still unclear how this is dumb. You can have grounded elements and fantastical elements. It's not a zero sum game. It isn't black and white.

 

Depends on the level of realism he is talking about. They can't be fully realistic because the concept is not realistic. They can be serious, but it isn't the same thing.

 

He's threatened and hates the more mature adaptation as he has invested himself in the silly / repetitive / loud side of the MCU. As a result of that hatred, he will pump up anything else just to put up an ever-failed fight against the impact of Nolan's Bat-films, Joker, etc.

He can repeat that "ashamed" crap until Doomsday, but it will ring as hollow at that time as it did the first time he ever posted it.

 

Ding ding ding!

The most serious/grounded superhero story ever told is still, on a fundamental level, patently absurd. Because it's about a superhero.

And that's okay. Really. It doesn't mean it can't move you, or inspire you, or be meaningful to you.

But claiming it's realistic is overcompensating. Also, kind of embarrassing.

 

Well, there was this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Jones

 

I didn't ever claim it to be fully realistic. I clarified that over and over again.

 

Fair enough. I think we just disagree on how much the notion of "realism" is applicable to these kinds of stories at all.

 

If it isn't applicable then it makes it more difficult to be engaged, at least for me. The more fantastical elements, the more we need something that is realistic and relatable. At least, for me. And, Batman is a detective. Its something is part of our ordinary world. So, it's OK to have thus grounded elements while exploring the more fantastical.

It's all about a balance, not a strict one or the other.

 

I'm not sure we're actually disagreeing here.

I reflexively balk at the word realistic when applied to superhero movies, because any "elements" notwithstanding, they are superhero movies first and foremost, hence pretty much the antithesis of realism.

But certainly some elements are more fantastical than others. And different movies emphasize the fantastical more or less overtly, or balance the elements differently, or embrace different tones, and all that's fine.

Again, I don't think we're disagreeing on substance, just semantics.

 

No, just the more pretentious adaptation.

IE, something unashamed of itself.

Those films HAD no impact. Logan is already forgotten, Joker will be too. The attempts at aping Nolan repeatedly failed so they'll be left in the past as well.

 

Then don't worry about. If it had so little impact then who cares? It's one interpretation. No shame-just a different adaptation.

 

This may be a really dumb question, but if to you the MCU is the Second Coming and the DC films are the Antichrist, why don't you just stick to watching and discussing Marvel movies and ignore the DC ones entirely? For example, I don't watch Star Wars and I don't post in any Star Wars threads. It saves me a ton of time and mental stress not having to constantly force myself to watch something I have no interest in and making sure everyone knows at all times just how much I don't like it.

Why not spend your time and energy doing something productive that will make you happy? Go outside and meet new people, read a good book, heck, read a Marvel comic book. The point is, why waste so many hours of your life whipping yourself into a frenzy of anger over something so inconsequential as a Batman movie?

 

You are probably right that we are probably not so far apart. I just get tired of the limited box that comic book films get put in to. You can have realistic elements, you can have pretty realistic plotlines and characters. The fantastical is more accessible when you do that, to my mind.

 

When I was a kid I loved to read the Famous Five and other similar mystery stories. They were pretty unrealistic, but they were just grounded enough that they felt like something that with enough imagination, just might be possible. That's something that Batman can do better than most of the other popular heroes.

 

Exactly. I think finding those grounded elements is helpful.

 

They aren't, the MCU had issues at the start and even through Phase 2 still needed to iron things out. What annoys me are the ones who act like the Dark Knight movies are the end all of cinema. I actually liked BvS mostly, loved Wonder Woman and wished we could've gotten an Affleck Batman movie.